[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 208 (Wednesday, December 20, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8177-S8178]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                HONDURAS

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on Monday, the head of the Honduras Supreme 
Electoral Tribunal declared Juan Orlando Hernandez the next President 
of Honduras. Shortly thereafter, the Secretariat of the Organization of 
American States, one of the principal international observers, 
announced that it could not certify the election as free and fair and 
called for a new election. Yesterday, after his top advisers rebuked 
the OAS for infringing on Honduras's sovereignty, President Hernandez, 
stating that ``the Honduran people have spoken,'' declared himself 
President-elect.
  On December 5, I spoke at length about the Honduran election, and I 
have made several statements since then. I will not repeat what I and 
many others have already said about the troubling process orchestrated 
by President Hernandez and his associates over the past several years 
to lay the groundwork for his reelection for an unprecedented second 
Presidential term, nor about the many irregularities that have caused 
masses of people to take to the streets in protest since the vote on 
November 26. As of today, at least 12 protesters, and perhaps as many 
as 20, have been killed and many more injured, mostly from military 
police firing live ammunition. I was disappointed that, in his speech 
yesterday, President Hernandez made no mention of those tragic deaths.
  As we await the Trump administration's decision on whether to support 
the OAS's call for a new election or accept President Hernandez' claim 
to a second term, I want to make three points.
  First, if this flawed election had been held in a country not led by 
a President whose consolidation of power and reliance on the military 
and police have had the strong backing of the White House and the State 
Department, it is doubtful that it would be accepted as free and fair. 
Instead, the White House, which has been willing to excuse the 
Hernandez government's corruption scandals and crackdown on the press 
and civil society, would likely be calling for a recount or, if the 
integrity of the ballots could not be assured, a new election.
  Second, the OAS deserves the thanks of people throughout this 
hemisphere for the role it has played as an impartial observer and for 
standing up for a free and fair election in Honduras at a time when 
democratic processes, freedom of expression and association, and 
independent judiciaries are threatened not only in Honduras but in many 
parts of Latin America. Next year, Presidential and Parliamentary 
elections are scheduled in many countries in Central and South America, 
and the OAS, which has been a strong defender of democracy and human 
rights in Venezuela, has a vital role to play in seeking to ensure that 
those elections meet international standards of fairness and 
transparency. It is therefore particularly important and reassuring 
that the OAS Secretariat has insisted on such standards in Honduras by 
calling for a new election, and it is just as important that the United 
States stands with the OAS at this time.
  Third, it is ultimately for the people of Honduras to decide what 
kind of a government they want and whether to accept the result 
declared by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, which has little 
credibility outside of President Hernandez's National Party. It is 
clear that the country is sharply divided politically, socially, and 
economically. Absent an electoral process that is widely accepted as 
free and fair, that divisiveness will imperil the progress that is 
urgently needed in combating poverty, violence, organized crime, 
corruption, and impunity that pose immense challenges for the future.
  But the international community and particularly the people of this 
hemisphere also have a stake in this election and in Honduras's future. 
In the past decade alone, the United States has provided many hundreds 
of millions of dollars in aid to Honduras, much of which I supported, 
but that aid has not achieved the results that the Honduran people and 
we wanted, and the reason for that, I believe, is primarily because 
successive Honduran Governments were not serious about addressing many 
of the key problems I have mentioned, yet the aid kept flowing. 
Unfortunately, I am not convinced that the current government is 
sufficiently serious about this, either.
  Honduras today desperately needs a freely and fairly elected leader 
who can unite the country. Unfortunately, this election lacked the 
conditions of fairness and transparency necessary to produce that 
result. If a new election is

[[Page S8178]]

held under such conditions, it is entirely possible that President 
Hernandez may win--or he may not. But for him, or any candidate, to 
obtain the mandate required to unite the country and make a credible 
case that his government is a deserving partner of the United States, 
it will need to be by rejecting the serious flaws of this election and 
demonstrating to all the people of Honduras and this hemisphere what 
real democracy looks like.
  I ask unanimous consent that today's Bloomberg View editorial calling 
for a new democratic election in Honduras be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

             The U.S. Should Back New Elections in Honduras

                  (By James Gibney and Michael Newman)


  Latin America needs to start its big election year on the right foot

       There is only one way out of Honduras's deepening political 
     crisis, and that is a new presidential election. It's a 
     solution the U.S., with its long history in Latin America, 
     should help bring about--although it would help if it had an 
     ambassador there.
       The certification this week of incumbent President Juan 
     Orlando Hernandez's contested victory in last month's 
     election has brought Hondurans into the streets, continuing a 
     wave of violent demonstrations that have claimed at least 24 
     lives. It comes after a deeply flawed ballot-counting process 
     that included long delays, after which Hernandez's early 
     deficit mysteriously disappeared. (The final tally put him 
     ahead by about 1.5 percent.) The vote was denounced by 
     numerous observers--including the Organization of American 
     States, which has called for new elections.
       Yet the U.S., which has no ambassador in Tegucigalpa or an 
     assistant secretary of State for the hemisphere, has been 
     only mildly critical. When Hernandez's victory was certified, 
     it urged opposing political parties to ``raise any concerns 
     they may have.'' And just after the disputed election, the 
     State Department renewed aid to Honduras--a move widely 
     interpreted as tacit support for Hernandez.
       Hernandez has won friends in Washington with his 
     willingness to crack down on crime and illegal migration to 
     the U.S., and his investor-friendly policies. At the same 
     time, his administration has been responsible for ugly human 
     rights abuses and been implicated in several high-profile 
     corruption scandals. Moreover, he has extended his tenure 
     only by packing Honduras's Supreme Court to lift the 
     country's one-term limit for presidents. The head of the 
     court responsible for certifying election results is one of 
     Hernandez's close allies.
       Even before last month's flawed vote, Honduras was notable 
     for the lack of popular confidence in its electoral 
     mechanisms. And if it's stability that Washington seeks, 
     these disputed results don't promise to achieve it. 
     Protracted unrest will only make fighting drugs and illegal 
     migration harder.
       The contrast between the OAS and the U.S. could also hurt 
     U.S. influence and credibility. The U.S. has rightly 
     supported the OAS in its efforts to hold Venezuela 
     accountable for its electoral crimes. If it fails to do the 
     same in Honduras, it risks setting a dangerous double 
     standard. This would be especially damaging in a year when 
     nearly two out of three Latin Americans are scheduled to go 
     to the polls.
       As the administration's just-released National Security 
     Strategy says, ``Stable, friendly, and prosperous states in 
     the Western Hemisphere enhance our security and benefit our 
     economy.'' The best way to ensure that Honduras becomes one 
     is to support free, transparent and fair elections.

                          ____________________